ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Linking Categorical and Dimensional Approaches to Assess Food-Related Emotions.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reflecting the two main prevailing and opposing views on the nature of emotions, emotional responses to food and beverages are typically measured using either (a) a categorical (lexicon-based) approach where users select or rate the terms that best express their food-related feelings or (b) a dimensional approach where they rate perceived food items along the dimensions of valence and arousal. Relating these two approaches is problematic since a response in terms of valence and arousal is not easily expressed in terms of emotions (like happy or disgusted). In this study, we linked the dimensional approach to a categorical approach by establishing mapping between a set of 25 emotion terms (EsSense25) and the valence-arousal space (via the EmojiGrid graphical response tool), using a set of 20 food images. In two 'matching' tasks, the participants first imagined how the food shown in a given image would make them feel and then reported either the emotional terms or the combination of valence and arousal that best described their feelings. In two labeling tasks, the participants first imagined experiencing a given emotion term and then they selected either the foods (images) that appeared capable to elicit that feeling or reported the combination of valence and arousal that best reflected that feeling. By combining (1) the mapping between the emotion terms and the food images with (2) the mapping of the food images to the valence-arousal space, we established (3) an indirect (via the images) mapping of the emotion terms to the valence-arousal space. The results show that the mapping between terms and images was reliable and that the linkages have straightforward and meaningful interpretations. The valence and arousal values that were assigned to the emotion terms through indirect mapping to the valence-arousal space were typically less extreme than those that were assigned through direct mapping.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.